>the rotary engine is shit, if it were any good they would

File: tracked.png (826KB, 634x800px) Image search: [Google]

826KB, 634x800px

............

From NSU engineers working in a shed to tens of millions being thrown at John Deere by NASA and the Department of Defense, the collective information from half a century of research and development has since 1991 been completely stagnant. Warehouses full of rotaries ranging from little mazda sized engines making 3hp per (actual rotary) cubic inch to industrial purpose 3000hp+ natural gas powered units. All sitting there. Doing nothing.
The technology Mazda, UAV engines ltd, any other company currently developing or producing rotary engines have pales in comparison to the above.
UAV Engines Ltd are only building rotaries because they got a hold of all of Nortons tooling and documentation when they went under. REI/Encompass made no effort to sell any of their rights from CWC, John Deere and RPI. Who knows why.

If CWC and Deere's work were able to be built on with modern technology, (like norton and UAV engines ltf) Ward Automotives guess of 85% cars on the road (by 1980) being rotary powered would probably be 85% of all engines, automotive or industrial by 2020.
For the brain dead sea lions, any basic research into John Deere and NASAs work with rotaries will show the future that was killed come 1991.

So next time some little faggot pistoncuck makes a half assed shit post asking "huur if itz so good why is it ded", remember that kikes (and liberals) killed the rotary not apex seals memes

>>16586692
Free bump my man

So what is the future for the rotary engine?

>tfw no screaming rotary shitbox

>>16586692
>Ignoring the companies that are currently manufacturing them of course...
That's a really bad argument for being a rotard.
>HUR DUR X IS GOODER THAN Y BECAUSE A FEW MANUFACTURERS MAKE A FEW THOUSAND OF X PER YEAR VS TEN BILLION OF Y

>>16587254
For commercial use, probably used as range extenders in hybrid vehicles

Mazda are the only company whose work with rotaries is related to consumer automobiles.. everyone else is making them for industrial and military use
Mazda say that evs will have a small market share by 2020 contrary to what everyone else is saying, and that most cars on the road will be hybrid. If mazda thinks this is so they probably have a lot of solid tech for rotary use in hybrid applications

File: file.png (288KB, 508x476px) Image search: [Google]

288KB, 508x476px

>tfw no baiku powered by at least 10 RC-size rotors

>>16586698
Wait, there's a conspiracy where some ghost company bought most of the patents to prevent anyone else from making a good one?

>>16588821
Possibly. Though it seems most likely that they bought all the rights with intention to draw in investors and run off with the money

>>16588827
Great plan desu.

But that means they aren't around to enforce the patents and anyone with a CnC machine can infringe on them.
Lots of them should be expired by now, too.

Maybe 3D printing will save the rotary sportscar.

>>16588842
All the documentation for designs etc would be in some dirty filing cabinets in an old warehouse somewhere forgotten by anyone who had anything to do with them

It would be hard for people to try and copy anything as all the engines John deere made are historic pieces now and in agriculture and military museums

Around 2008-2012 there were a few companies popping up claiming they had further developed on deere's designs
Typical "engine of the future" spiel from all of them
Not much other information about it.. they all dropped off the map after making a press release or two etc

A real shame as John deere had an engine that could cold start in -32f weather with no assist or special fuel
Just crank and go. Cool shit

>>16588842
>patents
patents expire after like 20 years

>>16588930
Usually 30, I believe, but they can be extended for longer.

Anyway, I heard those natural gas wankel rotary engines were crazy inefficient.
Being able to make 2000hp in the same size/weight as a 800hp diesel engine was not worth the extra fuel cost.
The power to size or weight ratios of rotary engines and their reliability in races don't translate well to industrial needs.

>>16589057
Apparently the natural gas units were originally diesel, modified to run on natural gas for use as generators or whatever on natural gas pipelines

Hm so.

I had this idea for a custom rotary engine.

At first I was thinking of taking a Renesis, single rotor, with a custom machined front and back housing, with the side intake and exhaust ports going out the front and back housings rather than bending 90 degrees to go out the side.
You guys follow, right? That's hopefully easy to picture.

I figure you could greatly increase the power of the engine in that configuration.
With that roughly 30% increased intake and exhaust area, better air flow, I believe greater than 100% VE could be achieved, and you could make at least 150 bhp off a single Renesis rotor that way, on pump gas (obviously at at least 1000rpm higher than the Renesis' peak, as you're no longer choked on the high end, but with flatter torque as well).

So I was thinking of that for a while, but it's limited to a single rotor. Sure, you can double the intermediate housing width to accommodate full size intakes and center side exhaust ports...
...but you lose the benefit of less bending which smooths out intake and exhaust flow, and makes it better able to take advantage of the mild supercharging effect from variable intake's resonance effect.

Then I realized.. you could cant one rotor 30 degrees or so, then add another flipped around, so you have a roughly X shaped block. Then you also have the added benefit more evenly dispersing heat, and the forces of combustion happening from opposite sides would balance out the engine even better than a rotary is balanced. Further, you could go with wider and narrower rotors for greater torque, in taking advantage of that natural balancing effect.

You make for a bit more intake and exhaust plumbing, but that's it. Seems like god engine to me.